https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0389-5543
![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Do renegotiations of existing free trade agreements (FTAs) increase mass support for other FTAs, and if so, how? The media and scholars have suggested that the recent uptick in support for a Canada-China FTA can be attributed in part to NAFTA renegotiations, based on trends in public opinion polls. In this article, I present a formal test of this causal claim. I identify two interrelated causal mechanisms (distribution of benefits from cooperation and market threat) linking NAFTA renegotiations as a causal variable to explain support for a Canada-China FTA. I evaluate these causal mechanisms using new data from a survey experiment carried out during NAFTA renegotiations. The results provide support for both causal mechanisms and are consistent with existing notions about why Canadians have recently increased their support for a trade deal with China. Policy implications are discussed following the analysis.
RÉSUMÉ
Les renégociations des accords de libre-échange (ALE) existants augmentent-elles le soutien massif à d'autres ALE, et si oui, comment ? En se basant sur les tendances des sondages d'opinions, les médias et les universitaires ont suggéré que le récent renforcement du soutien à un ALE entre le Canada et la Chine peut être associé en partie aux renégociations de l'ALENA. Dans cet article, je présente un test formel de cette revendication causale. J'identifie deux mécanismes de causalité interdépendants (distribution des bénéfices de la coopération et menace des marchés) reliant les renégociations de l'ALENA, comme une variable causale, pour expliquer le soutien à un ALE entre le Canada et la Chine. J'évalue ces mécanismes de causalité en m'inspirant de nouvelles données issues d'une expérience d'enquête conduite lors des renégociations de l'ALENA. Les résultats viennent étayer l'intérêt pour les deux mécanismes de causalité et sont conformes aux notions existantes des raisons pour lesquelles les Canadiens ont récemment solidifié leur soutien à un accord commercial avec la Chine. Les implications politiques sont traitées à la suite de cette analyse.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
Notes on contributors
Kim-Lee Tuxhorn is Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Calgary.
ORCID
Kim-Lee Tuxhorn http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0389-5543
Correction Statement
This article has been republished with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.
Notes
1 For examples suggesting a causal relationship between NAFTA renegotiations and support for a potential Canada-China FTA see: Asia-Pacific Foundation, 2017. 2017 National opinion poll - Canadian views on engagement with China. Available from: http://www.asiapacific.ca/surveys/national-opinion-polls/2017-national-opinion-poll-canadian-views-engagement-china [Accessed 2 January 2018], (Landriault and Minard Citation2018), “More than two-thirds of Canadians support a free trade deal with China” National Post. 23 October 2017. Available from: https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/more-than-two-thirds-of-canadians-support-a-free-trade-deal-with-china [Accessed 2 January 2018].
2 These talks include Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), the China-Japan-ROK FTA, the China-Norway FTA, the China-Sri Lanka FTA, the China-Israel FTA, an updated China-Singapore FTA, and an updated China-New Zealand FTA. Relatedly, the International Monetary Fund adopting the Chinese renminbi (RMB) as a Special Drawing Right (SDR) can further signal to voters the economic importance of the Chinese economy.
3 Government of Canada. 11 November 2017. “Public consultations on a possible Canada-China FTA”. https://international.gc.ca/trade-commerce/consultations/china-chine/report-rapport.aspx?lang=eng#a2 [Accessed 1 December 2018]
4 Although not the primary focus on this article, previous work has highlighted updating, learning, and shifts in power as reasons for renegotiations. See Haftel and Thompson (Citation2018) and Meyer (Citation2010) for more discussion on the causes of renegotiations.
5 The discussion of Mexico's relative gains is omitted here because the US trade policy was Canada's central concern during renegotiations. While the trade flows between Mexico and Canada are not insignificant, the Mexico-Canada side of the NAFTA triangle is overshadowed by US-Canada and US-Mexico bilateral trade flows. For instance, the US market accounted for 46% of Canada’s total imports and 73% of its total exports in 2017. For comparison, the Mexican market accounted for 6.7% of Canada’s total imports and only 2.1% of its total exports in 2017. (Data source: UN Comtrade Database (Citation2019). The year 2017 is the most up-to-date data available in the database.)
6 All vignettes can be found in the supplemental material along with survey questions.
7 For reference, 52.5% of the control group supported a proposed trade deal with China. Similarly, Landriault and Minard (Citation2018) cite an independent poll conducted by Nanos Research in 2017, stating that 54% of respondents supported an FTA with China.
8 For reference, population estimates can be found at Statistics Canada. Population by province: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/12-581-x/2018000/pop-eng.htm. The Prairies consists of Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba. Population by age and sex: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1710000501
9 The three dependent variables are correlated, with Support for FTA (in general) and Support for Canada-China FTA exhibiting the highest correlation of 0.412.
10 The supplemental material contains the results from using different model specifications, including models with only treatments. Additional diagnostics and model fit measures are reported as well.
11 Predicted probabilities are calculated using Long and Freese’s (Citation2014) SPOST package for categorical dependent variables while holding other variables at their means. The supplemental material contains a predicted probabilities table for all covariates.
12 BIC is a goodness-of-fit measure for maximum likelihood estimators. Models with covariates obtain lower BIC scores, indicating a better fit to the data compared to the treatment only models.